If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Hybrid vs. Diesel Debate

Just checked Canadian pricing on a Camry Hybrid ... its the same as a Prius in Canada

If your hell bent on getting a hybrid in Canada and you want Toyota reliability, you will get more car for you money with a Camry. I think its actually about the same 'base' as a Canadian HCH.

I still think a VW TDI is more compelling even though the lower average commuting speeds in Canadian cities because of their density and the high gas taxes should make hybrids more attractive if they were fairly priced ... and the Camry is getting there.

Hybrid vs. Diesel Debate

Hybrids are worthless. People are IDIOTS who think they are saving money when purchasing a hybrid. Compare any hybrid's price to that of a small normal 4-cyl car. You would have to drive your hybrid over 300,000 miles to break even on the upfront price difference.

The advancements in the automotive industry that are exciting are the V8's that are now getting near 30mpg (SS Impala for example) with the ability to shut off 4-cyl's at cruising speeds.

When you mash the gas, you have V8 throttle response and power, when you put her into overdrive, you have a fuel-efficiant 4-banger. Advancements in this area could lead to huge SUV's getting 25-30mpg highway, while cars like the Mustang GT are getting well into the 30's. It's all possible.

Hybrid vs. Diesel Debate

"People are IDIOTS who think they are saving money when purchasing a hybrid"

"When you mash the gas, you have V8 throttle response and power, when you put her into overdrive, you have a fuel-efficiant 4-banger."

So your point is...instead of paying extra for a hybrid powertrain, pay extra money for a V8 *with cylinder deactivation* over a more economical V6 with power you will use only 1% of the time (yes, you use the full horsepower of an engine only 1% of the time, unless you're a NASCAR/INDY driver or enjoy breaking speed limit laws)

People who buy V8s just because of power (unless their ACTUALLY hauling cargo) are IDIOTs too.

Hybrid vs. Diesel Debate

I have over 70 patents on a new engine read the folowing text:

1. Cylinderís changing capacity valueís numbers among: 1100-3300 cm
2. Compressionís changing report valueís numbers among 3-31;
3. Fuel will have used: merely or into mixture (petrol, diesel oil, alcohol, water and so on);
4. Exist the possibility to pick auto the best report with the lowest consumption into the timeís work of engine among 2.400.000.000. combinations between: cylinderís capacity and compressionís report;
5. The box gear couple into engineís block has an infinity gearís ratios;
6. Distributorís system is simple and pass away the sources of desertion in lose, when the driving belt and distributorís concatenation are brake off.
7. The pies-electric firing is with catalyser.
8. The engine has also the possibility to introduce again the fuelís gaze who includes the renders of fuels, into cylinders.
9. The makeís expenses are smaller comparatively with another well known engine.
10. Expenses of maintenance and operation of engine are very small.
11. The engine sizes and weigh by 30-50% percentage lower like well known engine.
12. Is not require the transformation of manufactured product line who assemble well known engines.
Engine prototype into first stayed of fulfillment with thechnicís managementsí of performance, experimentally and preliminary.

Hybrid vs. Diesel Debate

Mike, Mike, Mike. I'm simply stating the fact that this new technology is much more economically realistic to the average consumer. It costs thousands over the normal production cost of a vehicle to add hybrid technology. The cyclinder de-activation technology adds under 1,500. I used v8's in my example becasue this technology is currently only available on v8's. Soon, however, this will be a much more common feature on all cars. Why not have mid-sized v6 cars with this technology? Why not small commuter 4-bangers with this technology? It's cheaper, yet effective. This technology can also be obtained by a wider variety of consumers also. Few will put up the extra cash for expensive hybrid technology. The upfront price of the vehicle more than nuetralizing the gas savings.

Hybrid vs. Diesel Debate

I went from 36,000 dollar car to a 21,850 dollar hybrid. Hybrid technology really isnt very expensive regardless of the cost verbage. Also, the comparisons should be between the gas/maintenance/cost of previous vehicle to the new car. Usually a hybrid is a fiscal no brainer in this type of analysis, which is cash flow based specific to the individual purchaser.

Comparing a hybrid to its non-hybrid counterpart ( if any) isnt useful becuase these are two different demographics of purchasers as well as truely different cars.

Hybrid vs. Diesel Debate

Cylinder deactivation strikes me as having a very minimal impact. The most important factors in maintaining cruising speed are weight, rolling resistance and aerodynamic resistance. To keep a 5000 lb, brick-like SUV moving at 65 mph requires a specific amount of horsepower regardless of how many cylinders are providing it. The only advantage to cyl. deact. is that you don't need to pump a stoichiometric ratio of air/fuel 2 or 4 out of 8 cylinders. The impact will be quite small.

The way of the future for plane-jane gasoline engines is lean-burn technology using direct injection. That works like a diesel where precisely the amount of fuel needed to give the necessary hp for the job is used; there's no need to mantain a stoichiometric air/fuel ratio; but lean burn only works in steady-state cruising at modest loads. Presently the VW/Audi 2.0T engine is the only one in N. America with this technology but it can't meet its potential due to sulphur levels in our gasoline.

On the other hand direct-injection diesel uses precisely the amount of fuel needed at *all* times up to its maximum power output. No need at all for stoichiometric mixtures. Coupled with the higher energy content of a liter of diesel fuel over gasoline (approx. 10%), a diesel will use approx. 30% less fuel to do the same job as a gasoline engine. For conventional drivetrain (ie non-hybrid) automobiles, diesel is the most efficient answer.

The most promising gasoline technology is VW's Twincharger. A tiny 1.4 liter, direct-injection/lean burn gasoline engine is coupled to supercharger that works from start up to about 2500 rpm then is declutched and replaced by a simple fixed-vane turbocharger. The result is astounding: 40 mpg fuel economy with 170 hp and 177 lb-ft of torque starting at 1800 rpm. It's available in the European VW Golf. It's almost as economical as a TDI diesel and is probably easier to make US emissions compliant, but requires low-sulphur premium gasoline. It's the highest specific power output (hp. per liter displacement) available in any mass-produced gasoline engine.

That power output is the same as VW's previous 1.8T turbocharged gasoline engine, but the fuel economy is considerably improved, about 7 mpg better on the highway.

Cylinder deactivation doesn't come anywhere near these technologies in increasing fuel efficiency. The mpg gain will be 1-2 mpg at best, if that. Cadillac tried this many years ago and it was a flop.

N. American auto companies really have to do more engine research, and N. Americans in general have to wean themselves off of V8 SUVs. No fancy technology will ever make a 5000 lb non-aerodynamic vehicle fuel efficient.

Hybrid vs. Diesel Debate

I prefer the "kiss" approach. Keep it simple stupid. It took me several days to get through the technical speak you all use on here. I don't know much about any of this stuff. All I wanted was to know plain and simple whther a hybrid or a diesel would be the best choice GIVEN WHAT IS AVAILABLE NOW! Instead, I found myself reading insults hurled at each other, and factoid wars which mean absolutely nothing to me. We are all here because we want to decrease our reliance on oil, no? We all seemingly have the goal of reducing emissions, no?
I was hoping there might be some info on here which was understandable, helpful, and instead it looks liek people just want to prove their point is the correct one. Would someone please enlighten me. Since we only have 2 options RIGHT NOW, which is the least polluting?